I added my 2 cents in the Comments section:
How does anyone compare water vapor to 'smoking'? Which by definition is combustion and requires a flame? You don't 'light' an e-cig, there's no fire involved in any aspect of the process. That's the first misleading statement.
Then, you have the tobacco issue. There is no tobacco in any e-cig product, there MAY be nicotine, which is mostly known from tobacco, but is also available in other plants, including tomatoes, Many former smokers do not even use nicotine, they simply inhale food flavors in propylene glycol or glycerin, used as the primary dilutant in asthma inhalants- unless you think someone should ban asthma inhalers. Ecigs often satisfy the oral fixation of perhaps a decades long habit. This stops former smokers like myself from smoking tar completely, and saves the lungs of those around us, which is worse?
The fact that the tobacco industry wants to get involved in this non-smoking industry proves what? That there is smoking going on? You mean when Warren Buffet bought Heinz, the ketchup company became 'transportation' because he also owns railroad companies?
Tar is the main carcinogen in cigarettes. Tar and other byproducts of combustion. Again, there is no combustion process in e-cigs. As for 'smoking' in public places, you aren't smoking, and there is no 'second-hand smoke' resulting from not smoking. So why should it be banned in public places? Shouldn't you also be arguing that asthma inhalers should be banned in the same article?
Bravo, John Castle!! 
worth too!!!! 
